Whoopsie-daisy!: Kentucky State Rep. Accidentally Discharges

But Leslie Combs has brushed off the accident, claiming that it comes with the territory of gun ownership.

Click to expand...

This is perhaps the only time I've ever heard of a gun advocate claiming that accidental discharge simply came with the territory of gun ownership.

Amazing.

And yet, I'd have to agree. I know a lot of gun owners, and it seems like they all have stories of accidental discharges.

I have owned various guns for almost 50 years now. I have never had an accidental discharge while cleaning one.

Not to mention the idea of cleaning your gun in your office at work is a little odd, to say the least.

Of course, I haven't done a lot of shooting over the last decade, so I haven't done a lot of cleaning either.

Her excuse that it went off while she was cleaning it reeks of bullshit.

rugcat said:

I have owned various guns for almost 50 years now. I have never had an accidental discharge while cleaning one.

Not to mention the idea of cleaning your gun in your office at work is a little odd, to say the least.

Of course, I haven't done a lot of shooting over the last decade, so I haven't done a lot of cleaning either.

Click to expand...

Opty said:

Her excuse that it went off while she was cleaning it reeks of bullshit.

Click to expand...

Gee, proof that yet another politician is a liar, an idiot, or probably both.

I'm a big supporter of an armed citizenry, but I think the political class should be disarmed upon taking the oath of office, as that act demonstrates a willingness to initiate violence to advance your agenda.

If she wants violence visited on somebody, she should use the police, the military, or the court system, the way she's supposed to.

I know at least two people - one a cop - who had accidental discharges while cleaning their guns. For the cop, it was his habit, after removing the bullets, to pull the trigger a couple of times just to be very sure there was no way he could accidentally shoot himself while cleaning the gun. He swears that he'd removed the bullets and double-checked himself the day that he ended up shooting a hole in his roof, but my guess is he'd thought he'd left the gun unloaded and so had skipped that step.

Just another responsible gun owner*...




*(Before anyone jumps on me, I'm not saying all gun owners are irresponsible. Just that the number who say they are and the number who actually are are wildly different)

raburrell said:

Just another responsible gun owner*...




*(Before anyone jumps on me, I'm not saying all gun owners are irresponsible. Just that the number who say they are and the number who actually are are wildly different)

Click to expand...

Agree. And it seems like there's no way to know the difference until after the accidental discharge.

Glad no one was hurt.

Or until after the not-so-accidental discharge...

Monkey said:

This is perhaps the only time I've ever heard of a gun advocate claiming that accidental discharge simply came with the territory of gun ownership.

Amazing.

And yet, I'd have to agree. I know a lot of gun owners, and it seems like they all have stories of accidental discharges.

Click to expand...

I don't.

Neither do any of the RL gun owners I hang out with.

Accidental discharges are not okay. This story puts me into conniptions. When you're finished shooting,* you clear your fucking gun. Before you start field-stripping you also clear your fucking gun. It's the very first thing you do when you're cleaning it. And even after you've cleared it, you still treat it AS IF IT'S LOADED, and you keep your finger OFF THE FUCKING TRIGGER.



If someone is handling a firearm correctly, an accidental discharge while cleaning should be impossible. This isn't a "shit happens, humans make mistakes" thing -- there's too much redundancy built into gun safety for that. If you are handling a gun safely, it means you are doing multiple concurrent things to make sure it only discharges when you want it to. So this sort of thing doesn't mean the person made one mistake. It means a deliberate, flagrant ignorance or flouting of proper firearms safety. It should. Not. Happen.

I feel absolutely no sympathy or leniency for irresponsible gun owners. It's not a fucking toy.


* Unless you're carrying or leaving a gun loaded for home defense, in which case, you should damn well know it's loaded, and everything else above still applies.

I find her "it happens" attitude more worrying than the fact it happened.

veinglory said:

I find her "it happens" attitude more worrying than the fact it happened.

Click to expand...

Exactly! And I find that it happened pretty awful. Apparently, she thinks carelessness is fine. Unbelievable.

My accidental discharge is seen on the table in the upper left.

The friendly staff at the shooting range neglected to inform me that that particular model of Walther PPK had been recalled due to a manufacturing defect where it fires immediately upon releasing the safety.

Oops.

No, I don't own a gun. But I keep a wooden sword beside my bed.

raburrell said:

Just another responsible gun owner*...




*(Before anyone jumps on me, I'm not saying all gun owners are irresponsible. Just that the number who say they are and the number who actually are are wildly different)

Click to expand...

I agree. Every time there is a situation like this or worse, I wonder if the gun owner and those around him (or her) thought he was a responsible gun owner.

My husband owns guns. He doesn't understand why we can't have reasonable national gun laws with some kind of safety classes/ safety certification. When we moved from Florida, where he had to do very little to own his guns, to Massachusetts, where he had to pass a safety course and belong to a gun club, and re-register yearly, I think, he thought it was an improvement.

I have a problem with re-registering. Letting government track who is exercising their constitutional rights, that just bugs me. That's not a blanket rejection. I don't mind the FOID, nor permits like concealed carry. And initial registration of a gun when it's acquired is fine by me, too.

I'd rather hold gun owners criminally responsible if they fail to report loss of custody of a gun. Seems to me that this serves the same purpose as reregistration.

On the one hand, we have a car, which is potentially a lethal weapon, whose main purpose is to provide transport.
On the other, we have a gun, which is potentially a lethal weapon, whose main purpose is to propel a lethal projectile at very great speed and hit a target.

One of these things requires lots of training and a test to acquire a licence to use it. It boggles my mind that the other does not.

I don't have a problem with it so long as the object if dangerous or vulnerable, e.g. cars, poisons, prescription drugs, steel jawed traps, pets, adopted kids etc. I think that makes it a legitimate public interest.

@JimmyB27:

Only one of those two is cited as a right by the US Constitution. That's the complicating factor.

robjvargas said:

@JimmyB27:

Only one of those two is cited as a right by the US Constitution. That's the complicating factor.

Click to expand...

Huh? Neither guns nor cars resemble the fore-limbs of bears.

robjvargas said:

@JimmyB27:

Only one of those two is cited as a right by the US Constitution. That's the complicating factor.

Click to expand...

a well-regulated right. Always seem to forget that part...

kuwisdelu said:

My accidental discharge is seen on the table in the upper left.

The friendly staff at the shooting range neglected to inform me that that particular model of Walther PPK had been recalled due to a manufacturing defect where it fires immediately upon releasing the safety.

Oops.

No, I don't own a gun. But I keep a wooden sword beside my bed.

Click to expand...

Good God. I can't comprehend why they still have that weapon, let alone lend it without a VERY clear understanding of what could happen. Frankly, I'm appalled. I can't imagine your shock (and no, that was NOT your fault!)

Snowstorm said:

Good God. I can't comprehend why they still have that weapon, let alone lend it without a VERY clear understanding of what could happen. Frankly, I'm appalled. I can't imagine your shock (and no, that was NOT your fault!)

Click to expand...

Yeah, that was a bit freaky.

Makes for an interesting story, at least.

raburrell said:

a well-regulated right. Always seem to forget that part...

Click to expand...

Considering I just advocated for registration, and for criminal penalties for loss of control of a gun, I don't see how I've forgotten it.

raburrell said:

a well-regulated right. Always seem to forget that part...

Click to expand...

well-regulated didn't mean "wrapped in laws" when the 2A was written. It meant "competent," to put it briefly. Always seem to forget that part...

Don said:

well-regulated didn't mean "wrapped in laws" when the 2A was written. It meant "competent," to put it briefly. Always seem to forget that part...

Click to expand...

Given that we're in a thread where someone's arguing that accidental gun discharges are a part of normal operation, I think the issue of competence is pretty relevant.

If you really want to go down the road of conditions when the law was written, have at it, but given that it involved muskets, I don't find it terribly germane, personally.